sleeperkid
6842
527
20
Jul 3, 2026 5:58 PM
sleeperkid
6842
527
20
NickRivieraMD
No. Nope. Completely wrong on all counts.
JohnSmithterms
Between 1944 and 1963 america taxed the rich with a 92% income tax. There were still millionaires. This is socialism and what we need again.
HighSorcerer
That's sounds like something a communist socialist marxist fascist would say. And before anyone dogpiles on me about how you can't be all those things, this is sarcasm and Trump literally spewed that word salad in a public speech on camera.
or0b0ur0s
Capitalism: Anybody can be rich, but once enough people have done so, they make sure everyone else is poor.
Communism: Nobody can be rich, but those in power can certainly live like it.
knubberrub
There's also a Boomer FB meme that's going around saying "DS is not Communism, they are just Capitalists that (blah blah blah)" - Frens, Democratic Socialism is not Communist, but they sure as hell are not Capitalists, either.
NicoretteJunkie
Eh. Close enough.
CBadger
Capitalism - Anybody in power can be rich, but if you're in a situation where you have to work to get by, you will never improve your station.
zHurk777
Capitalism - anybody can be rich, but there will be a LOT of poor people.
Giraffehalf
You know how it’s generally unpopular to live in a home with big holes in the floor that guests can occasionally fall through into an inescapable pit? It’s like that but with the whole country.
torokunai
Communism -- only Party members can be rich
IUpVoteDadJokes
Jacobin magazine created a free book back in 2016 that gives a much more detailed definition of and introduction to socialism. https://s3.jacobinmag.com/issues/jacobin-abcs.pdf
expectnothingstillletdown
If this description is accurate, sign me up for communism.
Colopty
Oh it is severely inaccurate for capitalism as least, that system offers no guarantees of opportunity to anyone.
4Astaroth
It's pretty accurate. No one can be rich because everyone is equal.
Hereagain
I'm a communist. It's not accurate.
4Astaroth
So, what would you change about the statement that no one should be rich?
pixelsnader
I'd like to change the part where you say "because everyone is equal". There's a famous story how Stalin and some comrades came across a poor lady and had no money to give her, because the top of the hierarchy wielded so much power they always got what they asked/wanted/needed and therefore no longer used or carried money. There is always going to be power imbalance and accumulation; the key is how diffuse that. Communism doesn't solve that.
4Astaroth
Then that's no Communism. In Communism there is no power imbalance or different accumulation. Stalin never lived in a Communist society.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Something1Said
Why is this "gaming the system" argument so prevalent about communism when it isn't remotely unique to communism? We're supposed to use the legal system to stop people from "gaming the system" regardless of our economic model. In our current system, those gaming the system have taken control of the law which is exactly what I've been told all my life is the "bad ending" inherent to communism.
BlindGardener
This isn’t a post about Communism, it’s about Socialism.
Zetor
Ni, thats capitalism
Cornchip2000
Yeah- that's definitely not happening here...
IrvingSchwinglepuck
People are always going to game the system no matter what form of government is in place, thus making your argument irrelevant.
DavidBrooker
That's not what any of those mean. And for some reason it's unreasonably flattering to capitalism. Capitalism tends towards monopolies and rent-seeking. Entrenched capitalism *reduces* social and economic mobility and economic freedom.
KingKrabvoldIV
Capitalism is a broad term. Laissez-faire capitalism, sure. But you can still advocate for a system of private capital ownership regulated by antitrust and anticompetitive practices.
Beardedgeek72
Hi! Welcome to Social Democracy!
KingKrabvoldIV
Which incorporates capitalism into its socioeconomic paradigm!!!
ReaperCDN
Yes which is what the post says.
mindstorm8191
Okay, I'll amend it to say "Capitalism - Anybody could be rich, but only one person WILL be rich"
Yeah, unregulated capitalism always leads to the rich hoarding everything while everyone else has nothing
fknbastard
Socialism: publicly owned and maintained
Socialist economy: publicly owned companies sharing all production, resources, and profits
Socialist society: publicly owned utilities and services like healthcare, education, and protection
Neither prohibits private property or personal wealth. Communism abolishes private property but usually falls victim to political and community power as wealth
The701
or falls victim to a CIA-backed coup
doctorbocker
We get it. It's a sex thing.
IDontKnowWhatToDoAnymoreAndImTired
Arguable alternative to 100% publicly owned companies: companies as worker-owned nonprofit co-ops. Like imagine if the union itself owned the shop. Thoughts?
minipancho94
Look at Winco. Theyre awesome imho, but 7 years to get shares is wild. I feel state subsidization can make it work though. Ie you found a company, and it gets to a certain point. The workers start buying it off of you, leaving you a nice profit, or you retain a certain share until you retire/sell. So long as successful entrepreneurship isnt punished, it works. Starting new businesses itself could become a career for some if done right.
fknbastard
This works with privately owned businesses but shareholders are ruthless and we need to end shareholder primacy. Investing in a company should mean investing in the workers, the product or service, and its future as opposed to fast dividends and maximum return.
minipancho94
Considering that infinite growth and forever companies are part of the issue, the solution may be to figure out a method/ system for companies to die gracefully.
minipancho94
Eco socialist industrialism. Environmentally friendly/ compensated economies of scale (their more labor and resource efficient). Sustainable agriculture and etc. Current utilities absorbed by the state, and existing monopolies/megacorps are broken up into conglomerates and treated kinda like current utilities are. IE Amazon would be broken into pieces that could be worker owned and state regulated, but have a framework so it functions the same client side. The og owners can found a national park
xmaneds
REALLY GOOD description, very valuable, Thank You !
Camelspotting
Well except that most of the "socialist" Democrats you see are actually social democrats, not democratic socialists, they're just using the wrong name.
BastardMan1977
"Everything I don't like like is socialism!" Republican mantra
Cinnaderps
no no, everything is communism because the lead paint huffers can't remember socialism as much as the big red scary country that died 34 years ago.
slopwizard
Apparently socialism is when the municipal government asks you to turn off the AC, capitalism is when the federal government asks you to turn off the AC
IrrationalNumber
It has worked wonders for over half a century, so why would they care about the accuracy of it?
drduffer
Over a century. The narrative about the evils of Communism started after the October 1918 revolution in Russia.
IrrationalNumber
I was thinking of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Scare#Second_Red_Scare_(1940s–1950s)
drduffer
Joe McCarthy would have fit right in with today’s MAGA maniacs.
bohjeenie
Which is funny, as everything they actually like is socialism.